Effect of moisture regime and customized fertilizer on water use efficiency and economics of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.)

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(3): 2215-2220

International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences
ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 6 Number 3 (2017) pp. 2215-2220
Journal homepage:

Original Research Article

/>
Effect of Moisture Regime and Customized Fertilizer on Water Use Efficiency
and Economics of Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.)
Mohammad Irfan*, B.N. Singh and Ghansyam Singh
Department of Agronomy NDUA & T Kumarganj, Faizabad U.P.-224229, India
*Corresponding author
ABSTRACT
Keywords
Customized
fertilizers, Moister
regime, Wue and
economics.

Article Info
Accepted:
20 February 2017
Available Online:
10 March 2017

A field experiment was conducted to study the “Effect of moisture regimes and
customized fertilizers on the performance of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.)”
during Rabi season of 2010-11 at Agronomy Research Farm, Narendra Deva
University of Agriculture & Technology (Narendra Nagar), Kumarganj, Faizabad.

Highest WUE efficiency was recorded with 6 cm irrigation at 1.0 IW/CPE ratio
and customized fertilizer (F4). The highest net return and benefit-cost ratio of Rs.
79309.00 ha-1 and 1.78 were computed under treatment combination I2 F4 (6 cm
irrigation at 1.0 IW/CPE ratio + 8 : 18 : 26 : 1 : 0.1 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 : 67.5 :
97.5 : 3.75 : 0.37 : 22.5 kg ha-1).

Introduction
Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) ranks fourth
among major food crops of the world,
occupying an area of 19.26 million ha with
annual production and productivity of 320.71
million tonnes and 16.64 tonnes/ha,
respectively (http:// www.fao.org). Asia and
Europe are the world‟s major potato
producing regions, accounting for more than
80 per cent of world production. Irrigation
and fertilization are two important inputs in
potato production and increased production
depends upon efficient use of irrigation water
and fertilizers throughout the growth period.
In the present day context, the effective and
economic utilization of water and fertilizers is
very essential to reduce the cost of cultivation
and can best be achieved through the use of
improved irrigation techniques, viz. drip,
sprinkler and supplying balanced and

adequate doses of fertilizers. Use of drip and
sprinkler irrigation can increase the yield up
to 20–40 % along with water saving up to 39

% in potato crop (Pawar et al., 2002).
However, their adoption is restricted mainly
due to huge investment needed for installation
during the initial period. Therefore, the
economic feasibility of these techniques is
needed to be assessed for a short-duration
crop like potato. The response of applied
fertilizers is also expected to vary with
different methods of irrigation as frequency of
water application is different in sprinkler, drip
and conventional furrow irrigation system.
Further, it has been reported that soil
temperature causes large fluctuations in
potato yield and can be manipulated to some
degree by adjusting the soil moisture. High
evaporation rate and low amount of rainfall

2215


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(3): 2215-2220

during that period reduced the moisture from
the soil surface and creates a drought like
situation which reduced the yield. Potato is
very sensitive to water stress and even short
term water stress can cause significant
reduction in yield. Therefore, irrigation based
on cumulative pan evaporation will help to
maintain the soil moisture without any waste

of water. Keeping this in view the present
study was made to find the best irrigation
schedule Therefore, the present studies were
conducted to evaluate variable fertilizer doses
under different irrigation methods and assess
the economic feasibility of these techniques.
Nutrient management being one of the most
important input with sufficient available water
to achieve potential yield of potato. Water is
an important input for potato production and
its management problem varies from
irrigation to irrigation. Optimum soil moisture
is needed to be maintained in root zone to
meet crop requirement for higher yield. It can
be achieved best through the use of drip and
sprinkler irrigation system. However its
adoption is restricted mainly due to high
investment for short duration crop like potato,
which is most sensitive to soil moisture and
irrigated by underground water and which is
day by day the depleting. Hence
economization of water is a need of the hour.
Beside irrigation other factor is being fertility
levels and among different plant nutrients
nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium being
most important elements for promoting
growth, yield and quality of tubers in potato.
Nitrogen is an essential constituent of protein
and chlorophyll and found physiological
importance in plant metabolism such as

nucleotides,
phospholipids,
alkaloids,
enzymes hormones and vitamin. Nitrogen
promotes vegetative growth, tuber number
and tuber size. It increases to considerable
extent the utilization of potassium,
phosphorus and other micro nutrients.
Sulphur is constituent of essential amino acid,

vitamin and aromatic compound and provides
resistance against insect, pest and disease
resistance in plants.
The phosphorus is second limiting, nutrient in
potato production. Its deficiency retards the
growth and leaves become dull without luster
and increase tuber yield and number of
medium size tuber.
Potassium is the next essential nutrient for
potato production. The requirements of potato
crop for potassium or higher than those of
cereals. It increases the tuber yield by
increasing the number of large size tuber.
Micro nutrients in balanced proportion
increase potato yield by retards deficiency
symptoms. Potato tuber yield increased
significantly by application of zinc sulphate
(Neelima Joshi & Raghav, 2005).
Besides major nutrients boron and zinc are the
most important micro nutrient particularly in

our country because most of Indian soils are
deficient in these nutrients. Boron is essential
for translocation of sugar, reproduction for
IAA and other metabolic processes. Zinc is
essential mineral for IAA synthesis. Zinc
deficiency is closely related to the inhibition
of RNA synthesis, reduces root and shoot
growth and chlorophyll concentration of
leaves. Zinc is directly or indirectly required
by the several enzyme systems and closely
involved in the nitrogen metabolism of plant.
The costs of chemical fertilizers have
enormously gone up and are still on increase
it is necessary to examine alternative, cheaper
and easily available nutrient source to meet
out fertilizer requirements.
Materials and Methods
The experiment was conducted during the
winter season 2010-11 at Agronomy Research
Farm, Narendra Deva University of
Agriculture & Technology, Kumarganj,

2216


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(3): 2215-2220

Faizabad (U.P.). The soil of experimental
field was silt loam in texture, alkaline (pH
8.0), poor in organic carbon (0.35%) and

deficient in available N (147.5 kg/ha),
medium P (14.50 kg/ha) and rich K (210.1
kg/ha). The treatments viz. two moisture
regime- 0.8 IW/CPE ratio, 1.0 IW/CPE ratio
with 6 cm irrigation water depth and six
customized fertilizers viz. ICAR application
F1 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S) 120 : 80 : 100 : 2 : 0 : 8,
F2-12 : 26 : 18 : 1 : 0 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 :
97.5 : 67.5 : 3.75 : 0 : 22.5 kg ha-1), F3-18 : 28
: 10 : 1 : 0 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 : 105 : 37.5
: 3.75 : 0 : 22.5 kg ha-1), F4-8 : 18 : 26 : 1 : 0.1
: 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 : 67.5 : 97.5 : 3.75 :
0.37 : 22.5 kg ha-1), F5- 8 : 14 : 24 : 1 : 0.1 : 6
(N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 : 52.5 : 90: 3.75 : 0.37 :
22.5 kg ha-1) and F6-8 : 12 : 28 : 1 : 0.1 : 6
(N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 : 45 : 105: 3.75 : 0.37 :
22.5 kg ha-1). The experiment was laid out in
Randomized Block Design with four
replications.
All the nutrients except N were applied basal
as per treatment except N. Nitrogen was
applied in 2 splits between sowing and first
and second irrigation. Sulphur, zinc and boron
were applied as elemental sulphur (85 % S),
zinc chloride (45 % Zn) and borax (11 % B)
respectively. Potato variety, „Kufri Ashoka‟
was sown at spacing of 50 cm × 20 cm on 9th
November in 2010-11. Weed growth was
controlled by hand-weeding. All the other
recommended package of practices were

adopted during the crop-growth period. The
crop was harvested in the first week of
February, and tuber yield was recorded. After
taking into consideration the variable and
fixed inputs, the expenditure incurred on
various inputs was worked out for each
treatment. The selling price of potato was Rs.
4000/ tonnes and gross returns were
calculated on the basis of this price. Benefitcost ratio was worked out for different
treatments. At the end of the experiment, total
amount of water applied was calculated for
each irrigation treatment and the water use

efficiency (tonnes ha-1 cm) was calculated as
per the formula:
Water-use efficiency = Total yield of tubers
(tonnes) / Total water applied (cm)
Result and Discussion
Water use efficiency
The consumptive use of water (CU) and water
use efficiency (WUE) increasing with
increasing nutrient proportion up to customize
fertilizer F4-8 : 18 : 26 : 1 : 0.1 : 6
(N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 : 67.5 : 97.5 : 3.75 : 0.37 :
22.5 kg ha-1) (Table-2) Application of more
nitrogen favored the growth of plants, as they
consumed more amount of water for their
metabolic processes and transpiration which
in term led to higher consumptive use. The
increase in water use efficiency with

increasing nutrient level was mainly due to
proportionately higher increase in tuber yield
than consumption of water.
Starch content of the tuber is also affected by
moisture regimes. Increasing the regimes
decreased the starch content in the tuber. This
reduction in starch is due to hydrolysis of
starch in to sugar at higher water supply.
Moreover, larger supply of moisture has
increased the water content of the tuber.
Pahuja and Sharma (1982) also reported
similar results.
Tuber yield per unit of water applied
increased significantly in case of lower
moisture regime than higher regimes. I2
moisture regime has significantly lower value
of tuber yield per unit of water applied in
comparison to I1 ratio (Table-1 & 2.). Under
I2 moisture regime value decreased due to fact
that the water applied at this moisture regime
was more than its lower level but the tuber
yield differences was not so wide, the result in
close conformity with the findings of Bhan
and Dhama (1982), Hane and Pumphrey
(1984) and Chandra et al., (2001).

2217


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(3): 2215-2220

Table.1 Total tuber weight (kg plot-1) and (q ha-1) as influenced by moisture regimes and
customized fertilizers
Total tuber weight (kg
plot-1)

Total tuber yield (q ha1
)

26.42

220.19

I2
SEm±
CD at 5%
Customized fertilizers
F1

27.84
0.28
0.82

232.03
2.39
6.90

23.44

195.36

F2
F3
F4
F5
F6
SEm±
CD at 5 %

26.81
25.30
30.32
27.71
29.22
0.49
1.43

223.44
210.83
252.66
230.89
243.49
4.14
11.96

Treatments
Moisture regimes
I1

Table.2 Total water received and water use efficiency as influenced by moisture regimes and

customized fertilizers
Treatments
Moisture regimes
I1
I2
Customized fertilizers
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
F6

Total water received
(cm)

Water use efficiency (kg ha-1
cm-1)

16.3
22.3

135.0
104.04

19.3
19.3
19.3
19.3
19.3

19.3

101.22
115.77
109.23
130.91
119.63
126.16

2218


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(3): 2215-2220

Table.3 Economics of different treatment combinations
Treatments

Gross return
(Rs. ha-1)

Total cost of
cultivation (Rs. ha-1)

Net return
(Rs. ha-1)

B:C

90760

43468

47292

1.08

104000

43741

60259

1.37

99040

43589

55451

1.27

118840

43841

74999

1.71

108360

43502

64858

1.49

113320

43510

69810

1.60

96800

44118

52682

1.19

110600

44391

66209

1.49

103400

44539

59161

1.32

123800

44491

79309

1.78

113320

44152

69168

1.56

120440

44160

76280

1.72

I1F1Irrigation at 0.8 IW/CPE ratio + ICAR application
N:P:K:Zn:B:S 120 : 80 : 100 : 2 : 0 : 8
I1 F2 Irrigation at 0.8 IW/CPE ratio + customize
fertilizer -12 : 26 : 18 : 1 : 0 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 :
97.5 : 67.5 : 3.75 : 0 : 22.5 kg ha-1)
I1 F3 Irrigation at 0.8 IW/CPE ratio + customize
fertilizer- 18 : 28 : 10 : 1 : 0 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 :
105 : 37.5 : 3.75 : 0 : 22.5 kg ha-1)
I1 F4 Irrigation at 0.8 IW/CPE ratio + customize
fertilizer -8 : 18 : 26 : 1 : 0.1 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 :
67.5 : 97.5 : 3.75 : 0.37 : 22.5 kg ha-1)
I1 F5 Irrigation at 0.8 IW/CPE ratio + customize
fertilizer- 8 : 14 : 24 : 1 : 0.1 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 :
52.5 : 90: 3.75 : 0.37 : 22.5 kg ha-1)
I1 F6 Irrigation at 0.8 IW/CPE ratio + customize
fertilizer -8 : 12 : 28 : 1 : 0.1 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 :
45 : 105: 3.75 : 0.37 : 22.5 kg ha-1)
I2 F1 Irrigation at 1.0 IW/CPE ratio + ICAR
application N:P:K:Zn:B:S 120 : 80 : 100 : 2 : 0 : 8 )
I2 F2 Irrigation at 1.0 IW/CPE ratio + customize
fertilizer -12 : 26 : 18 : 1 : 0 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 :
97.5 : 67.5 : 3.75 : 0 : 22.5 kg ha-1)
I2 F3 Irrigation at 1.0 IW/CPE ratio + customize
fertilizer 18 : 28 : 10 : 1 : 0 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 :
105 : 37.5 : 3.75 : 0 : 22.5 kg ha-1)
I2 F4 Irrigation at 1.0 IW/CPE ratio + customize

fertilizer -8 : 18 : 26 : 1 : 0.1 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 :
67.5 : 97.5 : 3.75 : 0.37 : 22.5 kg ha-1)
I2 F5 Irrigation at 1.0 IW/CPE ratio + customize
fertilizer - 8 : 14 : 24 : 1 : 0.1 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 :
52.5 : 90: 3.75 : 0.37 : 22.5 kg ha-1)
I2 F6 Irrigation at 1.0 IW/CPE ratio + customize
fertilizer -8 : 12 : 28 : 1 : 0.1 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 :
45 : 105: 3.75 : 0.37 : 22.5 kg ha-1)

Economics
The variation in cost of cultivation were
recorded due to moisture regime, customized
fertilizers, which was increased with
increasing level of nutrient in customized
fertilizers, irrigation are the major monitory
inputs. Yield was major factor, which caused
differences in net income and net return per
rupee invested (Table-3).

Maximum cost of cultivation was recorded
under the moisture regime of 1.0 IW/CPE
ratio + customize fertilizer F3-18 : 28 : 10 : 1 :
0 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 : 105 : 37.5 : 3.75 : 0
: 22.5 kg ha-1)
while minimum under
treatment combination of 0.8 IW/CPE +
customize fertilizer ICAR application
N:P:K:Zn:B:S 120 : 80 : 100 : 2 : 0 : 8.
Maximum gross return (Rs. 123800 ha-1) was

2219


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(3): 2215-2220

recorded under the treatment combination of
1.0 IW/CPE ratio + customized fertilizers F48 : 18 : 26 : 1 : 0.1 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 :
67.5 : 97.5 : 3.75 : 0.37 : 22.5 kg ha-1). The
cost of cultivation was more due to more
number of irrigations, higher dose of nutrient
which increased cost of irrigation. Gross
return was more due to higher production of
tubers (Table-1&3).
Highest net return were obtained under 1.0
IW/CPE ratio + customized fertilizers F4-8 :
18 : 26 : 1 : 0.1 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 : 67.5 :
97.5 : 3.75 : 0.37 : 22.5 kg ha-1) and highest
benefit : cost ratio (1.78) were also recorded
under the treatment combination of I2F4 1.0
IW/CPE ratio + customized fertilizers F4-8 :
18 : 26 : 1 : 0.1 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 : 67.5 :
97.5 : 3.75 : 0.37 : 22.5 kg ha-1). This was
found due to low cost of irrigation and
customized fertilizers (Table-3).
In conclusion every increase in the level of
moisture regime increase in consumptive use
of water and decrease water use efficiency.
The higher water use efficiency (135.0) was
recorded under 0.8 IW/CPE ratio which was
more than that obtained under I2.

Minimum cost of cultivation was incurred
under I1 moisture regime but maximum gross
income was calculated under I2. Maximum
net return and net profit per rupees was also
recorded under I2. Minimum cost of
cultivation was incurred under customized
fertilizer F3-18 : 28 : 10 : 1 : 0 : 6
(N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 : 105 : 37.5 : 3.75 : 0 :
22.5 kg ha-1) but maximum gross income, net

return and benefit cost ratio were computed
under F4 -8 : 18 : 26 : 1 : 0.1 : 6
(N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 : 67.5 : 97.5 : 3.75 : 0.37 :
22.5 kg ha-1) followed by F6-8 : 12 : 28 : 1 :
0.1 : 6 (N:P:K:Zn:B:S 150 : 45 : 105: 3.75 :
0.37 : 22.5 kg ha-1)
Acknowledgement
Sincere, thanks are due to Dr. G. R Singh Dr.
B. N. Singh and Dr. R. B. Verma, NDUA&T
Faizabad U.P for his valuable guidance.
References
Bhan, S. and Dhama, C.S. 1982. Effect of
frequency and method of irrigation on
potato. Indian J. Agron., 27(3): 227230.
Chandra, Subhas, Singh, R.D. and Bisth, J.K.
2001.Water use and yield of potato
under irrigation constraints. Annals of
Agri. Res., 20(1): 128-129.
Hane, D.C. and Pumphery, F.V. 1984. Yieldevapotranspiration relationship and
seasonal crop coefficient for frequently

irrigated potatoes. American Potato J.,
61: 661-668.
Pahuja, S.S. and Sharma, H.C. 1982.
Response of potato to high soil moisture
regimes, levels of nitrogen and spacing.
Agri. Sci. Dig., 2(1): 32-34.
Pawar, D.D., Bhoj, P.G. and Shinde, S.H.
2002. Effect of irrigation method and
fertilizer levels on yield of potato
(Solanum tuberosum L.). Indian J. Agri.
Sci., 72(2): 80-83.

How to cite this article:
Mohammad Irfan, B.N. Singh and Ghansyam Singh. 2017. Effect of Moisture Regime and
Customized Fertilizer on Water Use Efficiency and Economics of Potato (Solanum tuberosum
L.). Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci. 6(3): 2215-2220.
doi: />
2220